hopskip

well Gilkes preferable as there are two exit routes at all times. Woodwarde and Calton are in any event challenged to approach in restricted hours and this will encourage heavy vehicle access. Home goal Southwark planning - can you legitimately grant planning permission on a determined access route and then ignore consequences when your actions make this impossible?

Understand our local communities and their composition, stop anodyne statements and get real about the complexity and staging for change? You are in a privileged position it seems. Do you refuse/can afford any non-recyclable packaging in your buying habits for example? Nigello Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Walk more. Drive less. Minimise deliveries. > 🤷‍♂️

The three Council consultation meetings regarding the Dulwich ETOs and the way forward are underway - final one in June, two took place in May. Are there public recordings for those of us who want to hear what was discussed at the earlier meetings? Please direct me to them if so. Our pre-Covid council meetings were recorded so there is no reason not to have this principle for the public record? If this consultation is genuine, go to the promoted website: https://dulwichreview.eventbrite.co.uk/ Scroll down and try to register for the June 19th event - our last chance. The link is no longer operating? Where are the recordings from the earlier two PUBLIC meetings? Who do WE ASK at Southwark?!! How can we register for the June 19th meetings @ Dulwich Ward councillors?

In the chaos of LTN closures, this is an unexpected event that has disrupted Southwark's plans. At EDG, traffic southbound through DV is permitted but the opening of this route through Gilkes from EDG was not planned for by Southwark. It should have been. Southbound traffic is acceptable under the DV ETOs and a route to the South Circular is an advantage. So it should be welcome that Gilkes no longer has the privilege that was only granted due to the working development site. Let me explore further. The route granted by Southwark in the planning permission acceptance for this site was via Dulwich Village into Carlton Avenue. This route has been closed off by Southwark. When Southwark impose major road network access changes, what is the legal implication for planning developments that they have granted and dictated? is this traffic forced to approach via Calton or Woodwarde now if Gilkes is closed? Why should Gilkes have a benefit over Calton or Woodwarde in terms of heavy vehicular access? Is there a legal right to contest access plans that have been granted by Southwark when they remove the provisions they have dictated?

Yes people asked could be the session be recorded but Andy Simmons and Dale Foden said not - no clear reason for this departure from recording Council public meetings. Some attending will of course have made their own records. It is easy to do so. The meeting Chat was stated by Dale Foden as available for everyone to make a copy. Very unsatisfactory meeting - not one attendee spoke in favour of the closures. Prepared answers and as expected Southwark predetermined agenda. I recommend attending one of the next sessions to hear why critical air and road monitoring data has not been presented with the survey, although stated to be being measured, and why is it still being withheld. Worth asking how the consultation has been adapted to ensure it complies with legal requirements to seek views from under 18s and how these are to be weighted in the overall results. Really poor meeting with the now familiar patronising comments and agenda from Southwark officials - Andy, Catherine, Dale

I find this thread concerning - seems to be bullying a shop for some reason which I suspect is not to do with environmental issues, crucial though they are. Hopefully Oddonos can answer for themselves.

Appalling behaviour on Twitter towards a Health Centre and those less able. Unacceptable post and pressure. Perhaps this link with Southwark? http://www.greerpritchard.com/projects/southwarkDesignReviewPanel.asp role design manager for Southwark Council GreerPritchard director established and managed Southwark's Design Review Panel in 2006. Southwark is a Thameside borough in central London. The Panel provides advice and enabling services in relation to major urban development projects and is highly respected in its own right. Appointed to the panel in 2010 and is currently serving for a second term. legalalien Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > So - Twitter. Reporting Elm Lodge surgery no > longer supporting Dulwich Alliance as it?s > possible to get there outside the closure hours. > Fine. But then this comment about how everyone in > Dulwich can afford a taxi anyway (see attached).

Great open letter - thanks for the genuine effort to get a dialogue going. Don't stop. Petition still open I see, for anyone who may want to sign. http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgEPetitionDisplay.aspx?ID=500000057&RPID=774779172&HPID=774779172 Ping me if struggling to get past the sign in - there is a problem for some.

Southwark have just published proposals on their next Covid ETMO measures in case you haven't seen it. Decision page:http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgDelegatedDecisions.aspx?&RP=0&K=0&V=0&DM=0&HD=0&DS=0&Next=true&META=mgdelegateddecisions&DR=09/08/2020-23/08/2020. Scroll down and look for the two links - Batch 2 and Batch 3 (top and bottom of list currently) Here is the link?for the Area B/C Dulwich scheme additions:http://moderngov.southwark.gov.uk/mgIssueHistoryHome.aspx?IId=50023654&Opt=0 Jaw dropping mess and implications. Our Cllrs have obviously been supporting these for some time.....

I suggest that Southwark Events should be active communicating with ward Councillors to withhold support given the lack of licences? Rather indulgent/perverse of Cllrs to support this given the weddings, funerals, events generally that are barred at present......... alice Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Yes that is the advice I was given by Southwark > council today.

See Rockets Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Which councillor - James McAsh?

exdulwicher Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > The goings on at that junction are annoying now - there was some sort of musical duet there a couple of > weeks ago, people standing around. It's still a road - there were still cyclists and pedestrians and a > couple of people on mobility scooters looking to get through it all and finding it quite difficult, > especially to maintain social distancing. Not going to be long before some idiot dancing in the "square" > collides with a scooter or cyclist and blames the legitimate road user. As I pointed out, interesting to see our Councillor turn up to support. Southwark Events have confirmed that the organisers have no licence to use this space as none are being issued under Covid measures. See above posting Yesterday, 08:02PM.

It is interesting to see our Councillor turn up to support, no effort to social distance at this Covid-19 designated closed junction and Southwark Events confirming that the organisers have no licence to use this space as none have been issued under Covid measures. Southwark website: Please be aware that we are not currently accepting, or processing event applications. We are working to produce guidance for the recommencement of public outdoor events in Southwark, in line with recent Government recommendations and this information should be available shortly. https://www.southwark.gov.uk/events-culture-and-heritage/events/planning-an-event/hiring-a-park-or-public-open-space

I wonder what your evidence is for saying this. Or just your biased attempt to discredit? I have been following One Dulwich and can see that they have been pushing our Councillors to explain what the monitoring plans are - ie advocating car (and cycle) counting tubes, air pollution monitoring etc. More to the point, my Residents' Association is pressing for answers on monitoring plans. I receive updates from my RA attending biweekly meetings with our Councillors. Councillors have confirmed that tube monitoring is expensive and that they are moving the tubes around and in fact removing them - more to go down in Sept when the schools are back. But they were not able to relay a full monitoring plan including tube measurements and 'what' they are actually measuring nor is air quality planned to be measured. My evidence you ask? The most complete (but not, I have to say, meaningful) statement is not easily discoverable but is within the frequently asked questions at the Southwark commonplace site: https://dulwichvillagestreetspace.commonplace.is/ See item 7 - for all it is worth, not a comprehensive plan in my view: 7. How will we monitor the impact of the changes and assess whether they meet their objectives? The monitoring criteria we are using to assess the scheme are:  Modal shift towards walking and cycling, with particular focus on the journey to school and short trips  Qualitative feedback from residents, local community and businesses  Use of public space by the community for active travel, leisure or play  Net changes in traffic in residential areas  Net changes in traffic on the distributor roads in comparison to London-wide traffic changes Video surveys will be periodically installed around the area at key junctions and high footfall areas to assess how the streets are being used by the community. We will be collecting traffic data at key sites in the area, including both residential streets and bordering distributor roads. We will also be monitoring feedback from the community - see point 10 below. Air quality data will not be part of the monitoring process, as it is not possible to solely filter out the traffic contribution to poor air quality. We will be using change to traffic levels as a proxy for the air pollution contribution by motor traffic. More details on the monitoring programme, locations and results will be provided in due course and made available at thebestnameshavegone Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Of course it is. The last desperate lurch of an > entitled group of polluters, resorting to petty > vandalism. > > > > > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Someone's cut the tubes on the pneumatic car > > counter on Calton avenue. It looks more like a > > deliberate disablement of it rather than kids > > vandalism. > > > > One dulwich supporter?

Before legal action we need the facts? The obvious way to obtain any information that is not forthcoming is an FOI request. This is costly on the Council's time and resources and so it's reckless of them to create a situation where people are forced to resort to this. There is an art to making an FOI request so that data (including associated emails, meeting notes (if Council is meeting informal groups they should make a record of such meetings) and even phone records)come to light.

Does any one know the legal process that needs to be followed to close residential roads?

Hi James, Can you advise on the legal procedures that apply in England to the closure of residential roads? Many thanks in advance.

Using Explane app now - thanks for flagging. I have also had the leaflets from Hacan East through the door and am returning to object to ban the intrusive weekend extensions of flights. Early mornings are now a significant nuisance.

Calling again on Woodwarde Rd this time. Very threatening and aggressive and would not leave when asked. Threatening to come back. I think these need to be referred to the police as they call.

Don't forget to respond by the 22nd December see separate thread started by James Barber with all the details: http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?5,1650717,page=5 It says it will be decided by a Community council determination, as part of the acknowledgement - copied below. Your response has been submitted Acknowledgement of representation Thank you for your representation. All representations received during the statutory consultation period will be logged and considered. Determination of an objection We have a duty to consider all objections as well as a commitment to make those decisions transparent to the public. The decision of how to proceed will be determined by the community council at a later date. This decision will be taken by way of a formal report that outlines the background to the proposals, your comments and an officer?s response to those comments. Your representation may be published within that report that will be reported to the community council; this will exclude any personal information, such as your name and address. The council?s decision Once a decision has been made in regard to this matter we will write to you to inform you of the outcome and the reasons for that decision.

Lowlander Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ed_pete Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > Consultation closes on 22/12. Don't sleepwalk > > into this one. Register your objections to > your > > Councilors and on the Southwark website. > > Or support. We are allowed to hold independent > opinons! Not quite so straightforward now that there are 5 choices. You might support but with some caveats. Officers are only obliged to respond to comments made with Objections. So even if you support but with some modifications, it is better to use option 4 and note what you want to see changed. You need to categorise each response & you can choose from one of 5 options: Options 4 or 5 are appropriate if you want the Council to say whether it accepts or rejects your feedback. The options are: 1. I wholly support this proposal; 2. I support this proposal, but would like the council to consider additional or alternative measures; 3. I neither support or object to this proposal, but would like the council to consider another related matter in this area; 4. I object to part of the proposal, but support or am neutral to other elements of it; 5. I wholly object to this proposal I agree about the point about not sleepwalking into this. Whether you support or object, you need to respond.

Reasons Why Residents Object to Double Yellow Lines : Respond by 22nd December deadline 1. They are unnecessary ? no history of accidents or bad parking 2. They destroy the residential character of the local streets ? turning a quiet conservation area into an urban thoroughfare 3. The changes are too sweeping at a time of so many other local traffic and parking space changes 4. They are a waste of taxpayers? money ? because this ?costly exercise? isn?t needed 5. They remove parking spaces ? making parking a future problem when it?s not at present 6. They ignore the majority views of residents ? making a mockery of consulting the public These are a summary of the many comments submitted by residents during the public consultation in April. However, Southwark has disregarded them and insists that individual objections must be made once again. In their recent walkabout on 7th December, Officers stated that they were not planning to change their proposals. Southwark?s full proposal with details for the 123 plus junctions is at: https://consultations.southwark.gov.uk/environment-leisure/borough-wide-junction-protection/ You can input for each location or road at: https://consultations.southwark.gov.uk/environment-leisure/borough-wide-junction-protection/consultation/intro/ You need to categorise each response & you can choose from one of 5 options: Only comments submitted with objections need to be addressed by the Council. Options 4 or 5 are appropriate if you want the Council to say whether it accepts or rejects your feedback. The options are: 1. I wholly support this proposal; 2. I support this proposal, but would like the council to consider additional or alternative measures; 3. I neither support or object to this proposal, but would like the council to consider another related matter in this area; 4. I object to part of the proposal, but support or am neutral to other elements of it; 5. I wholly object to this proposal I agree about the point about not sleepwalking into this. Whether you support or object, you need to respond.

rch Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Melbourne Grove South has 6 residential roads > feeding into it (which is a large part of what > creates the "volume" of traffic), so this means > that a total of 24 parking spaces could be lost > along here. > Yellow lines Page 59 of the DCC report states: ? A local parking amendment is (a) small project to change an existing parking restriction or to introduce a new one. So, in Southwark's mind, a small project can correspond to multiple (in total 126) junction changes within a small radius, all proposed together. ? It also states that these tend to be carried out in locations where there is dangerous or obstructive parking. There is NO evidence of accidents at the proposed junctions. Doesn't anything have to be justified in a relevant and specific way rather than anecdotally? I hope this issue gets more sensible consideration by Councillors at the DCC tomorrow evening. It is scheduled as the last item so if you are going, then hang fast for this item. Perhaps it will get raised early in the meeting too.

There is a cash point going into the Chemist in the other parade of shops. That should suffice. Letter sent out by Sainsbury's it seems. I got it electronically from a neighbour and so do not know who received it rhough the post. I am not keen on the shop front design - somthing more sympathetic to a conservation area would be nice. Tone down the orange and the HUGE letters on the fascia I would say and do we really need a projecting illuminated sign too? Is there an illuminated projecting on Lordship Lane out of interest? I guess we reply to this letter with our views, or perhaps it does go to a planning application It's not clear. Text posted below but I can't post the design unfortunately. Too large. Dear Resident Proposed Sainsbury?s Local, 88 Dulwich Village I am writing to outline our plans for a new Sainsbury?s Local at 88 Dulwich Village. We?ve been looking for a suitable site in Dulwich Village for some time and were pleased when the landlord approached us with an opportunity to open a new convenience shop (which is currently occupied by Shepherds). We have already met with local councillors and a number of residents but wanted to share further information with yourself. Our convenience stores provide a different offer to our supermarkets and are designed to meet the everyday top up shopping needs of local residents who live within a short distance of the store. They offer an excellent range of fresh fruit and vegetables, dairy products, bakery goods, drinks, snacks and other convenience products. The shop will be open from 7am to 11pm and create 15 local jobs. I am pleased to say that colleagues from Shepherds will be transferring to the new store. We also recognise that the shop is in a conservation area and have brought forward a ?heritage? inspired design which we believe is sympathetic to Dulwich Village and compliments existing retailers. You can see the front elevation for our proposed store at the end of this letter. The deliveries will be to the front of the store, as is currently the case. Our convenience stores generally receive one to two deliveries a day. These are supplemented by our suppliers who deliver goods such as bread, milk and newspapers daily. Although delivery times are dependent upon routes and traffic, we will work with neighbours and the local community to minimise disruption and inconvenience wherever possible. Sainsbury?s Supermarkets Ltd 33 Holborn London EC1N 2HT Telephone 020 7695 6000 www.sainsburys.co.uk As a responsible retailer, we also seek to play an active role in the local community, which includes promoting safer neighbourhoods. An example of this is our ?Think 25 Policy?, whereby all colleagues are trained to check the age of anyone buying alcohol if they appear to be aged 25 or under. Each of our stores support a nominated local charity every year and Sainsbury?s also runs a nationwide Active Kids programme that helps invest in sporting equipment for schools and local groups. Since 2005, Southwark has benefitted from ?600,000 of new equipment. We will shortly be submitting the relevant planning applications to allow us to open the store. In the meantime, should you have any questions regarding our plans, please do not hesitate to contact myself on [email protected] or call 07900 709393. Yours sincerely David Mills Head of Property Communications 62911_05.indd 1 17/11/2015 10:31

Use Callows Locksmith on Melbourne Grove.